THERE has surely never before been a government thrown out of office after presiding over an economy which grew by an average of over 7.5 per cent during its period in office. But such has been the fate of the Rainbow.

One possibility is that the electorate wisely judged that governments do not "create" economic growth and thus based their votes on other factors. But the other is that the public was not happy about the divisions of the fruits of growth and felt, specifically, that none of the Celtic Tiger was ending up in its tank.

The most interesting thing about yesterday's national accounts was not the 1996 growth estimate. In itself this showed a GNP growth rate of 6.9 per cent, a little below Ruairi Quinn's 8 per cent forecast, but, lets face it, we're getting a bit picky if we call 6.9 per cent below expectations.

However the astonishing thing was the revision of the 1995 forecast, with GNP now estimated to have expanded by no less than 8.8 per cent that year, driven principally by an almost 20 per cent rise in the volume of exports. This is a rate of growth not seen anywhere else in the industrialised world in recent years.

Now there has long been argument about how accurately the official figures reflect what is really happening in the economy. But whatever quibbles might be taken with the precise estimates, there can be no doubt that the rate of economic expansion since 1994 - when growth was "just" 7.8 per cent has been unprecedented in Irish economic history.

So why was the Rainbow chucked out and particularly the Labour party hit so hard? Many of the reasons were no doubt political, rather than economic. But many voters - particularly in the PAYE sector - appear to feel that they were not gaining substantially from the boom. To many, talk of record growth rates is all very well, but they do not feel that it is translating into a big improvement in their standard of living.

There are some clear winners from the growth of recent years. One is those leaving education, the vast bulk of whom can now find a job at home rather then emigrate. The job creation performance of the economy has been way ahead of the international average.

But for the average PAYE worker the gains may have been less obvious. Wage rates have been controlled rigidly under successive national programmes and while taxes have been cut, the reductions have been gradual rather than dramatic.

In contrast, others are obviously coining it from the economic boom. Many businesses have recorded strong rises in profitability, providing a windfall to their owners. Big money is being made in sectors like construction, retailing, professional services like law and accountancy and parts of manufacturing.

But the new Government may also find that the general dissatisfaction of the PAYE taxpayer is hard to deal with. The conundrums is that a cornerstone of the rapid improvement in the economy in recent years has been wage restraint. If wages start to rise more rapidly, then it could in turn depress further growth.

One answer would be more rapid tax reductions. And the Programme for Government just published promises this, offering a goal of reducing the two income tax rates to 20 per cent and 42 per cent, along with other reforms. Cutting tax rates will offer greater benefits to the better off - particularly reducing the top rate - but the FF/PD coalition will argue that it was elected on a mandate taking this route to reform.

If it is to deliver on its promises, then the new Government will have no time to waste in restraining the growth of spending. Its first Budget will offer its best opportunity. Beyond that its promises of £1.5 billion of tax cuts over five years may be blown off course by economic circumstances. Next year's Budget may be generous, but beyond that monetary union and slower growth may mean leaner pickings in later years, particularly if pressure comes on public spending.